Talk:Long range shuttle
Cabin The "cabin" portion of this vessel is identical to several Starfleet shuttles seen in the Enterprise docking bay. It's a better assumption that this was a regular shuttle, operated by the Vulcans, with a warp-sled attachment rather than a whole new class of vessel. :I think the one you are bringing up is the Bee which is much smaller then this craft. but still I do wonder if this is a Vulcan shuttle. It could just be a shuttle used by the Vulcans. --TOSrules 02:47, 26 Jul 2005 (UTC) Starfleet standard shuttle * Image removed, originals found at http://www.probertdesigns.com | Are we quite sure about it being a Vulcan design? Seems odd that there would be a half dozen visible with Starfleet markings if that were the case--[[User:Memory epsilon|'MƏmory Σþsilon']] 19:15, 28 June 2006 (UTC) :I see two in the picture you just put up, and I don't see any Starfleet markings. What is the problem? Am I missing something? --OuroborosCobra 20:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC) The point is that the bay is obviously designed for them to fit there, someone must have intended for them to be used as standard shuttles of some kind, thus calling them exclusively Vulcan doesn't really make any sense, especially when the Enterprise herself is obviously carrying several of them--[[User:Memory epsilon|'MƏmory Σþsilon']] 20:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC) * Image removed, originals found at http://www.probertdesigns.com | Another angle, showing a landing bay too narrow to support anything other than those flat angular shuttles :Well, another problem i that these don't look like screencaps, but rather like concept paintings. Unless they are screencaps, I don't think that they can be considered canon. --OuroborosCobra 21:03, 28 June 2006 (UTC) Then it's not a problem, as of the DVD release they were upgraded from unused concept paintings to actual screen caps, hence the people and standing set on the bottom. Which retcons the Surak from a Vulcan courier to a Starfleet shuttle--[[User:Memory epsilon|'MƏmory Σþsilon']] 21:50, 28 June 2006 (UTC) :Those people standing at the bottom look like part of the painting. There is a lot of concept art for TMP that has people in it, such as the painting of the K't'inga bridge, which have klingons visible. That does not make them canon, just more pretty. I realize they are on the DVD, but are they there as extras, or as actual scenes in the movie? Makes a big difference. --OuroborosCobra 23:10, 28 June 2006 (UTC) Yes, they're in the movie, and no the people at the bottom don't look remotely like part of the matte painting, in fact..--[[User:Memory epsilon|'MƏmory Σþsilon']] 23:28, 28 June 2006 (UTC) * Image removed, originals found at http://www.probertdesigns.com |..here are the people standing around in a big room without the matte painting. :Heh, we've indented pretty far. That las picture (which you put up after my last post) is the first one that looks to me like the people are not part of the matte painting. Now, I'm starting to wonder about this craft. Hmm. Anyone have any production information, like what the modelwas called? --OuroborosCobra 00:42, 29 June 2006 (UTC) :: See this interview, where this is also pointed out. There appears to be an original Probert sketch there that indicates that the one that appeared in the cargo/shuttle bay was the "standard" starfleet shuttle, whereas the courier was the "long range" starfleet shuttle. At least that was the intentions while this all was on the drawing board. --Alan 01:50, 31 May 2007 (UTC) Does that mean we should consider creating "Standard Starfleet long range shuttle"? Seems like these images should fit somewhere, perhaps the article on Federation shuttlecrafts?--[[User:Memory epsilon|'MƏmory Σþsilon']] 23:19, 6 June 2007 (UTC) On second thought, the Probert interview you added to the article sums this all up nicely, though it would be nice if we could make use of one of those images in some way--[[User:Memory epsilon|'MƏmory Σþsilon']] 11:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC) :: Well the thing is, the "standard shuttle" never appeared on screen, and afaik, appeared solely in production art, unless someone can provide a non-DE screencap showing otherwise. --Alan 05:00, 8 June 2007 (UTC) ::: Why must it be a non-Director's Edition? Isn't the DE "canon"? --General Grant 07:30, 12 January 2008 (UTC) :: Yes, but regarding this, it doesn't appear in the DE, hence why I was asking if anyone had the non-DE version to see if such an image exists. --Alan del Beccio 07:33, 12 January 2008 (UTC) ::::I checked my DVD of the DE and a video cassette of the non-DE version. It doesn't appear in any of the two versions. --Jörg 10:37, 12 January 2008 (UTC) Old topic, but while there the shots mentioned above aren't in the movie, the shot of it from VOY lists it only a the "Long range shuttle," so the Vulcan part should be dropped. - Archduk3:talk 07:21, October 7, 2009 (UTC) Warp capable(?) This article currently states that the long range shuttle was capable of warp speeds, but I don't see any on-screen evidence for this and (on the contrary) Andrew Probert actually states in this interview that he conceived the craft as having only reaction control thrusters. I might be missing where its warp capacity is established, though. Can anyone source it? --Defiant 12:35, October 29, 2011 (UTC) I figured out I must have misread that interview, since he's talking about the cab of the long range shuttle having only RCS thrusters; the lower portion (what Probert calls the "warp sled") would be the warp-capable part. Even then, I don't see this distinction made on-screen. --Defiant 12:55, October 29, 2011 (UTC) :If it didn't have warp capability, then Spock would have been in that thing for a decade or two in transit to the Enterprise. :) --31dot 13:26, October 29, 2011 (UTC) But the Enterprise is clearly at a standstill when the long range shuttle docks with it. How do you know Vulcan is so far from the ship at that point? Even if it is, the long range shuttle may have been carried, at warp, to close proximity from the starship by a super-duper large Vulcan craft which then had to depart! My point is: we don't know that the long range shuttle had warp capability, so it's speculative to say that it did. --Defiant 14:16, October 29, 2011 (UTC) This issue seems similar to the discussion about "canon geology" here. Assumptions from on-screen, canonical evidence were disallowed there, so I don't see why we should allow it here. --Defiant 14:35, October 29, 2011 (UTC) ::I don't see the connection to the discussion about Vulcan at all, since that was based solely on the sets and drawings, while we clearly have the term "long-range shuttle" used for this, with the giant nacelles only supporting that. It might be different if this wasn't described as a long-range shuttle, but the simplest explanation of what a long-range shuttle is would be a warp-capable shuttle. We don't need to bend over backwards to say otherwise. - 23:30, October 29, 2011 (UTC) Alright. Thanks for reminding me of the name – it must have skipped my mind, but I'm happy to consider that ample evidence. :) --Defiant 00:57, October 30, 2011 (UTC)